After the tragedy at Sandy Hook, I wrote to our senators and to my House representative asking them to reenact legislation to ban assault weapons.

Dr. Michael Burgess, who represents the 26th House District, was kind enough to respond. In his letter to me he explained what he has done to support safety in our schools. He also stated the following: “I am strongly opposed to any limitations on the United States Constitution's Second Amendment rights of law-abiding gun owners.”

Any limitation? Apparently Dr. Burgess would permit any weapon, without regard to its destructiveness and lethality.

Let's assume that in the future, a weapon is invented that can instantly kill anyone within a 100-foot radius of the weapon, except for the shooter, with a single discharge. Do we allow this firearm to be possessed by anyone who can buy it? Where do we draw the line?

I say the line has already been drawn. Disallow assault weapons now.

Louis DeGiulio, Flower Mound

AR-15 is today’s musket

The AR-15 assault rifle is simply the product of the evolution from “long guns” common to the regular military foot soldiers of the 1700s. Our founders wanted citizens to own and maintain firearms consistent with the military issue weapons of the day. Today, this would not include RPGs, bazookas, cannons, road-side bombs or atomic bombs, as those devices were not common to the “regulars.” Long guns -- muskets, in those days – were common.

It's no different than the evolution from horse and buggy to the F-150, and no one could foresee Alexander Graham Bell's “telephone” invention turning into the iPhone. Yet 37,000 a year die today on American roads from the fatal mix of motor vehicles and texting. That’s not grounds for banning either one but rather to call for responsible use of these devices.

The Second Amendment is not about sportsman, duck-hunting or target shooting. Guns in the hands of citizens temper the ambitions of an aggressive government. That is the purpose of the amendment.